APPENDIX 17A. REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS SUPPORTING 

MATERIAL
 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

17A.1 BACKGROUND ON MARKET PENETRATION CURVES DEVELOPED 

BY XENERGY..................................................................................................... 17A-1 

17A.2 UTILITY REBATE PROGRAMS FOR COMMERCIAL CLOTHES 

WASHERS AND RESIDENTIAL DISHWASHERS ......................................... 17A-2 

17A.2.1 Rebate Programs for Commercial Clothes Washers............................................. 17A-3 

17A.2.2 Rebate Programs for Residential Dishwashers..................................................... 17A-5 

17A.3 DEVELOPMENT OF CONSUMER TAX CREDITS IMPACT ANALYSIS.... 17A-9 

17A.4 EPACT 2005 FEDERAL TAX CREDIT LEVELS FOR RESIDENTIAL 

APPLIANCES AND APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS ............................... 17A-11 

17A.4.3 Residential Appliances........................................................................................ 17A-11 

17A.4.4 Energy Efficient Appliance Credits for Manufacturers...................................... 17A-11 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 17A.2.1 Rebate Programs for Commercial Clothes Washers................................. 17A-4 

Table 17A.2.2 Rebate Programs for Residential Dishwashers......................................... 17A-6 

LIST OF FIGURE 

Figure 17A.1.1 Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing External and 

Internal Influences on Consumers ............................................................ 17A-2 

17A-i 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

 

 

APPENDIX 17A. REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS SUPPORTING MATERIAL 

17A.1	 BACKGROUND ON MARKET PENETRATION CURVES DEVELOPED BY 

XENERGY 

Xenergy, Inc. developed a re-parameterized, mixed-source information diffusion model 

to estimate market impacts induced by financial incentives for energy-efficient appliances. The 

basic premise of this mixed-source model is that information diffusion drives technology 

adoption. 

There is extensive economic literature on the diffusion process of new products as 

technologies evolve. Some of the literature focuses primarily on the development of analytical 

models of diffusion patterns of new products for individual consumers or for technologies from 

competing firms.1,2,3 One study records researchers’ attempts to investigate underlying factors 

that drive diffusion processes.4

 Because of the distinct characteristics of diverse new products, 

few studies have conclusively developed a universally-applicable model. Some key findings, 

however, have seemed to gain wide recognition in academia and industry. 

First, new technologies may not be adopted by all potential users, regardless of their 

economic benefits and technological merits. Therefore, a ceiling on the adoption rate exists for 

many products. Second, not all adopters purchase new products at the same time; some act 

earlier after the introduction of a new product, while others respond slowly, waiting for products 

to become more mature. Third, diffusion processes can be approximately characterized by 

asymmetric S-curves, depicting three stages of diffusion: starting, accelerating, and decreasing 

as the adoption ceiling is being reached. 

An important diffusion model, the epidemic model, is widely used in marketing and 

social studies on diffusion. It assumes that a) consumers value the benefits of a new product 

identically and b) the cost of a new product is constant or declines monotonically over time. 

What induces a consumer to purchase the new product is information about the availability and 

the benefits of the product. In other words, it is information diffusion that drives new product 

adoption by individual consumers.3 The model incorporates information diffusion from both 

internal sources (news spread by word of mouth from early adopters) and external sources (the 

“announcement effect” by government, other institutions, or commercial advertising) by 

superimposing a logistic function with an exponential function.1,4 

The relative degree of influence by internal or external sources determines the general 

shape of the diffusion curve of a specific product.1,4 For instance, if the adoption of one 

particular product is more influenced by external sources of information diffusion 

(announcement effect) than by internal sources (word of mouth among earlier adopters to 

prospective adopters), the rate of diffusion at the beginning stage of the diffusion process is 

much higher. This reflects the immediate information exposure to a significant number of 

17A-1
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
prospective adopters brought about by external sources, in contrast to the more gradual exposure 

to internal sources such as news propagation by earlier adopters, a small proportion of the 

population, to other prospective adopters. Graphically speaking, a relatively dominant external 

source of information diffusion gives an immediate jump-start to the adoption of a new product 

in the first years, forming a concave curve with respect to the Y axis (see the exponential curve 

in Figure A.1). Adoption of a new product with a stronger influence by internal sources of 

information diffusion (such as a socially-tightened network formed by prospective adopters) may 

start with a few early adopters and gradually increase as the number of adopters grows, and thus 

form a convex curve (see the logistic curve in Figure 17A.1.1). 

0% 

10% 

20% 

30% 

40% 

50% 

60% 

70% 

80% 

90% 

100% 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 

Year 

Market Penetration 

Logistic Function Modified Exponential Function 

External Influence 

Internal Influence 

Figure 17A.1.1	 Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing External 

and Internal Influences on Consumers 

17A.2	 UTILITY REBATE PROGRAMS FOR COMMERCIAL CLOTHES 

WASHERS AND RESIDENTIAL DISHWASHERS 

The following two tables present a summary of rebate program amounts offered 

throughout the U.S. for commercial clothes washers and for residential dishwashers. 

17A-2
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
17A.2.1 Rebate Programs for Commercial Clothes Washers 

DOE found 24 agencies with programs for commercial clothes washers. Rebates for this 

product have been offered by electric utilities, gas utilities, water utilities, and municipal and 

regional agencies. These entities offer rebates for commercial clothes washers meeting 

efficiency criteria that usually match those set by ENERGY STAR or the Consortium for Energy 

Efficiency. In some areas customers can receive rebates from both their energy and water 

utilities. Table 17A.2.1 shows the agency names, States, rebate amounts, and program websites. 

Multiple entries in the table indicate either that an agency offers two rebate amounts (i.e., one for 

customers with gas water heaters and another for those with electric water heaters) or that the 

agency is an umbrella for several rebate programs. The average rebate amount is a simple 

average of the wide range of all of the entries (rather than being population-weighted). 

17A-3
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
Table 17A.2.1 Rebate Programs for Commercial Clothes Washers 

Utility or Agency State Amount Website 

Alliant Energy IA $100 http://alliantenergy.com/docs/groups/public/documents/pub/p015218.hcsp 

CPUC LightWash (former) CA $450 http://www.cuwcc.org/Uploads/annual_reports/FY2003/Annual_Report_20LADWP CA $430 http://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/cms/ladwp001820.jsp 

SoCalGas, SCE CA $210 http://www.mwdsaveabuck.com/multifamily.html 

SDG&E (Sempra) CA $75 http://sdge.com/residential/PY2006-08MFapplication.pdf BAWSCA (Bay Area) CA $220 https://www.conservationrebates.com/programs/cop/CoinOp.aspx 

Contra Costa County Water District/PG&E CA $220 http://www.ccwater.com/conserve/rebates_cwasher.asp SFPUC CA $150 http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/commercialwasherrebate.h

$200 

EBMUD CA $150 http://www.ebmud.com/conserving_&_recycling/non_residential/clothesw

$250 

Silicon Valley Power CA $350 http://www.siliconvalleypower.com/bus/?sub=rebatewash 

City of Austin TX $250 http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/watercon/cwasher.htm 

$100 

Seattle Public Utilities WA $100 http://www.savingwater.org/business_laundryrebate.htm 

$125 

$50 http://www.savingwater.org/inside_laundry_washwise.htm $75 

$100 

BPA $180 http://www.bpa.gov/Energy/N/projects/post2006conservation/manual/ 

$75 

PG&E CA $35 http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/application/07App_GI.pdf 

$75 

EBMUD CA $150 http://www.ebmud.com/conserving_&_recycling/non_residential/clothesw

$250 

Riverside Public Utilities CA $75 http://www.riversideca.gov/utilities/busi-energystar.asp 

Albuquerque Water Utility Authority NM $100 http://www.abcwua.org/pdfs/Washer%20Rebate.pdf Marin County CA $50 www.marinwater.org Helix Water District (San Diego) CA $300 

Truckee Donner PUD CA $100 http://www.tdpud.org/index.php?cId=34 Energy Trust of Oregon OR $225 http://www.energytrust.org/residential/mf/clotheswashers.html 

$180 

Puget Sound Energy WA $200 http://www.pse.com/solutions/forbusiness/pages/comRebates.aspx?tab=4&Seattle Water Utility WA $300 http://www.savingwater.org/business_WSTP.htm#financial 

Number of Agencies 24 Average Rebate Amount $174 Rebate Percent of Incremental Cost 31% 

Websites last accessed January, 2008. 

17A-4 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
17A.2.2 Rebate Programs for Residential Dishwashers 

DOE found 88 agencies with programs for residential dishwashers. Rebates for this 

product have been offered by electric utilities, gas utilities, and municipal and regional agencies. 

These entities offer rebates for dishwashers meeting efficiency criteria that usually match those 

set by ENERGY STAR or the Consortium for Energy Efficiency. Table 17A.2.2 shows the 

agency names, States, rebate amounts, and program websites. Multiple entries in the table 

indicate that an agency offers two rebate amounts, one for customers with gas water heaters and 

another for those with electric water heaters. The average rebate amount is a simple average of 

the wide range of all of the entries. 

17A-5
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
Table 17A.2.2 Rebate Programs for Residential Dishwashers 

Utility or Agency State Amount Website City of Roseville CA $25 http://www.conservationrebates.com/programs/REC/AppliancesProgram.aspx Aspen CORE CO $75 http://www.aspencore.org/sitepages/pid46.php#washer 

Fort Collins Utilities CO $25 http://fcgov.com/water/washer-rebate.php 

Holy Cross Energy CO $25 http://www.holycross.com/ 

$75 

Longmont Power CO $50 http://www.ci.longmont.co.us/lpc/index.htm 

Groton Utilities CT $60 http://www.grotonutilities.com/elec_conserv_resident_appliance.asp Kootenai Electric ID $25 http://www.kec.com/rebates.php Rocky Mountain Power ID, UT $20 http://www.homeenergysavings.net/idaho/dishwashers.html 

Linn County REC IA $50 http://www.linncountyrec.com/cgi-script/csarticles/articles/000003/000334.htm Maquoketa Valley REC IA $25 http://www.mvec.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=

Eastern Iowa REC IA $25 http://www.easterniowa.com/ 

East-Central REC IA $25 http://www.ecirec.coop/prod_serv/rebates.shtml 

TIP REC IA $35 http://www.tiprec.com/rebates.html Consumers Energy IA $25 http://www.consumersenergy.coop/residential/products_services/incentives/index.ht

Guthrie County REC IA $25 http://www.guthrie-rec.coop/cgi-script/csArticles/articles/000000/000049.htm 

Farmers REC IA $25 http://www.farmersrec.com/Promotions.htm Southwest Iowa REC IA $25 http://www.swiarec.coop/prod_serv/rebates.shtml Clarke EC IA $25 http://www.cecnet.net/rebates.html 

Chicopee Electric Light MA $50 http://www.celd.com/news.php?id=36 

Concord Muni Light Plant MA $50 http://www.concordma.gov/pages/ConcordMA_LightPlant/appliance 

Mansfield Muni Elec Dep't MA $75 http://www.mansfieldelectric.com/rebateBrochure/billingForm.html Marblehead Light Dep't MA $25 http://www.marbleheadelectric.com/rebate.htm 

Marblehead Light Dep't MA $50 http://www.marbleheadelectric.com/rebate.htm 

North Attleboro Electric MA $30 http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentivesearch.cfm?Incentive_Code=MA6

e=Rebate&CurrentPageID=7&EE=1&RE=1 

Reading Muni Light Dep't MA $50 http://www.rmld.com/rebates.htm Shrewsbury Electric MA $50 http://www.shrewsbury-ma.gov/light/rebates.asp 

Wakefield Gas & Light MA $50 http://www.wakefield.ma.us/Public_Documents/WakefieldMA_MGLD/rcsprogram.

Lincoln Electric Co-Op MT $10 http://www.lincolnelectric.coop/energy_star_rebates.htm 

City of Anaheim CA $50 http://www.anaheim.net/article.asp?id=992 

Burbank Water and Power CA $75 http://www.burbankwaterandpower.com/homerewards.html PG&E CA $30 http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/dishwashers/index.html 

$50 

SDG&E (Sempra) CA $30 http://www.sdge.com/residential/singleFamilyRebate/docs/rebateOverview.pdf 

Southern California Gas CA $30 http://www.socalgas.com/residential/savemoney/instant.shtml, City of Lompoc CA $50 http://www.cityoflompoc.com/splash/utilprograms.htm 

Glendale Water and Power CA $40 http://www.glendalewaterandpower.com/smart_home_saving_rebates.asp 

17A-6

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
Utility or Agency State Amount Website 

Hercules Municipal Utility CA $50 http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentivesearch.cfm?Incentive_Code=CA1

pe=Rebate&CurrentPageID=7&EE=1&RE=1 

IID Energy CA $50 http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentivesearch.cfm?Incentive_Code=CA9

e=Rebate&CurrentPageID=7&EE=1&RE=1 

Lassen MUD CA $35 http://www.lmud.org/rebate.htm 

Lodi Electric Utility CA $25 http://www.lodielectric.com/residential/rebateoffer.php?id=2 

City of Palo Alto CA $50 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/utl/news/details.asp?NewsID=65&TargetID=12 

Plumas Sierra Rural Electric Coop CA $35 http://www.psln.com/energy_rebates.php?sec=enersol&pag=enerreb 

Redding Electric Utility CA $25 http://www.reupower.com/energysvc/energy-rebates.asp Riverside Public Utilities CA $50 http://www.riversideca.gov/utilities/resi-energystar.asp SMUD CA $30 http://www.smud.org/rebates/index.html 

$50 

Truckee Donner PUD CA $100 http://www.tdpud.org/index.php?cId=34 

City of Gridley CA $25 http://www.gridley.ca.us/documents/appliancerebateapp.pdf 

Imperial Irrigation Districtq CA $50 http://www.iid.com/Media/PubRebApp-En_WEB07b.pdf 

Hawaiian Electric Company HI $50 

http://www.heco.com/portal/site/heco/menuitem.508576f78baa14340b4c0610c510b5b2110VgnVCM1000005c011bacRCRD&vgnextchannel=6558f2b154da9010VgnV

&vgnextfmt=default&vgnextrefresh=1&level=0&ct=article#mainContent%20id 

Kauai Island Utility Cooperative HI $50 http://www.kiuc.coop/co-opportunities/index.htm 

Blachly Lane, Eugene OR $5 http://www.northwestenergystar.com/index.php?cID=183&searchType=state&state=

shers&slSearch=search 

Central Electric, Redmond OR $25 

Ashland OR $30 OR 

$60 

Bandon OR $50 Columbia River PUD, St. Helens OR $25 

Consumers Power, Philomath OR $20 

Douglas EC, Roseburg OR $30 Emerald, Eugene OR $25 Eugene Water and Electric OR $20 Forest Grove OR $30 

Milton Freewater OR $15 Monmouth OR $15 Salem Electric OR $60 

Tillamook OR $25 Wasco, The Dalles OR $25 Cheney WA $21 

$24 

Chewelah WA $100 

17A-7

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
Utility or Agency State Amount Website 

Mason County PUD #3, Shelton WA $25 Mason County PUD #1, Shelton WA $60 Modern Electric, Spokane WA $22 

$24 

Snohomish County, Everett WA $35 Okanogan County WA $50 

Coulee Dam WA $60 Wahkiakum PUD #1, Cathlamet WA $75 

Delco ID $15 City of Rupert ID $15 

East End, Rupert ID $15 

Riverside Electric, Rupert ID $50 

Soda Springs ID $15 

Fall River, Ashton ID $25 

Farmers, Heyburn ID $15 

Idaho Falls ID $15 

Northern Lights, Sagle ID $25 Glacier, Cut Bank MT $25 Lincoln, Eureka MT $10 Mission Valley , Pablo MT $50 

Anoka Muni Utility MN $50 http://www.ci.anoka.mn.us/vertical/Sites/%7B213A9A90-C8E1-49AA-AC02- 51D3C4882D33%7D/uploads/%7B93715A51-EA59-4213-BD5E-73A264F5E4F2%

Buffalo Municipal Utilities NY $50 http://www.ci.buffalo.mn.us/Utilities/Electric/EnergyRebate.htm BPA $25 http://www.bpa.gov/Energy/N/projects/post2006conservation/manual/ 

Number of Agencies 88 Average Rebate Amount $37 

Websites last accessed January, 2008. 

17A-8

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

 

17A.3 DEVELOPMENT OF CONSUMER TAX CREDITS IMPACT ANALYSIS 

Clothes Washers 

To analyze the Consumer Tax Credits policy for commercial clothes washers (CCWs), 

DOE studied the Oregon Department of Energy’s experience with Residential Energy Tax 

Credits (RETC) for residential clothes washers (RCWs). DOE chose RCWs because the product 

is similar to CCWs, and because the available data on Oregon's Business Energy Tax Credits 

(BETC)—which include CCWs—did not disaggregate tax credits claimed by appliance. Also, 

the ENERGY STAR program did not have data on CCW shipments. 

Note that the RETC efficiency level for RCWs is minimum MEF of 2.0 and maximum 

water factor of 6.5. The proposed standard level for CCWs is minimum MEF of 2.2 and 

maximum water factor of 5.1, which is a stricter level. However, DOE assumed that by 2012 

consumer behavior would be similar under a tax credit program aimed at high-efficiency CCW 

units. 

As stated in the RIA chapter, DOE calculated that Oregon taxpayers claimed credits for 

almost one quarter of Oregon’s total residential clothes washer shipments in 2006. DOE needed 

to estimate what portion of those taxpayers claiming credits were primarily motivated by the tax 

credits themselves, what portion were influenced by utility rebate incentives, and what portion 

were "free riders"—those who would have purchased efficient appliances without a tax credit or 

rebate incentive but still claimed the tax credit. To attribute the Oregon tax credits claimed to 

each of these influences, DOE reviewed a report prepared by KEMA on efficient RCWs in the 

Northwest. This report studied the penetration of residential clothes washers in Oregon and 

Washington, two neighboring states that have utility rebate programs for this product.5 KEMA 

made a "highly conservative estimate" that 50 percent of Oregon's ENERGY STAR clothes 

washers were “ultra high efficiency” (UHE)a units, based on tax credit data from Oregon 

Department of Energy (ODOE). In contrast, KEMA made a "highly conservative estimate" that 

15 percent of Washington’s ENERGY STAR clothes washers were UHE models, based on 

rebate data from two utilities in the State. (KEMA also estimated that 19% of the State’s 

population was eligible for rebates.) KEMA’s report attributed the difference in UHE market 

share in the two States to the Oregon tax credits. Based on this attribution, DOE estimated that 

38 percent of the tax credits claimed were actually due to rebates; these represent 9 percent of 

total shipments. 

To estimate the free riders among the Oregon clothes washer shipments, DOE used the 

market penetration of the baseline CCW units on the penetration curve presented in Figure 

17.3.6. This penetration was 9.2 percent of total shipments, which is 38 percent of the number of 

tax credit claims. DOE then estimated that the remaining 24 percent of the Oregon clothes 

a	 Units meeting specifications of minimum MEF of 2.20 and maximum WF of 6.5 ( which are also the Oregon tax 

credit specifications). 

17A-9
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

 

washer tax credits claimed for the years 1998–2005 were attributable to tax credits alone, or 5.8 

percent of total shipments. 

Dishwashers 

For 2006 DOE calculated that Oregon taxpayers claimed credits for 14 percent of 

Oregon’s total dishwasher shipments. DOE did not find data comparing Oregon and 

Washington’s efficient dishwasher sales. To estimate the portions of these tax credit claims that 

were likely due to utility rebates and to market impacts, DOE reviewed a report by Itron on 

utility rebate programs in California. That report compared the percentage of free riders in 

residential clothes washer and dishwasher rebate programs in 2005.6 Itron found that the 

penetration rate of ENERGY STAR dishwashers (85%) was much higher than that of ENERGY 

STAR clothes washers (40%).b

 Itron also found that the percentage of free riders was greater for 

dishwasher programs than for clothes washer programs. DOE’s previous estimates showed that 

the incremental cost from the baseline was much smaller for high-efficiency dishwashers than 

for high-efficiency clothes washers,7,8 which could explain the higher penetration rate for 

efficient dishwashers; an incentive program for a product whose market share is already high 

would tend to have more free riders. Based on these various factors, DOE estimated that market 

impacts (part of which are due to free riders) were responsible for a higher percentage of 

dishwasher tax credit claims than were market impacts for residential clothes washer tax credit 

claims. 

Itron’s report contained two estimates of free riders for ENERGY STAR dishwashers for 

2005. DOE took the simple average of the supplier estimate of 93% in the self-reported 

consumer estimate of 59%, yielding 76%. DOE compared this to the simple average of free rider 

estimates for residential clothes washers, which were 77% from suppliers and 43% from 

consumers, yielding 60%. DOE assumed that the difference in free riders between the two 

products would be on the order of the difference between these two estimates (16%). 

DOE interpreted the higher percentage of consumers purchasing dishwashers as free 

riders and then claiming tax credits, and the lower percentage of taxpayers influenced primarily 

by rebates, estimating that 49 percent of Oregon's 2006 dishwasher tax credits claimed (6.9 

percent of total dishwasher shipments) were due to market impacts. It estimated that utility 

rebates were responsible for 32 percent of tax credits claimed (4.5 percent of total shipments). 

DOE attributed the remaining 20 percent of tax credits claimed (2.8 percent of total shipments) 

to tax credits. 

b

 Values are from ENERGY STAR website based on D&R International data by state. 

17A-10
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

17A.4	 EPACT 2005 FEDERAL TAX CREDIT LEVELS FOR RESIDENTIAL 

APPLIANCES AND APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS 

17A.4.3 Residential Appliances 

The residential appliance Federal tax credit qualification specifications are: 

•	 Furnaces and boilers: Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) 95 or higher 

•	 Central air conditioning units: highest tier standards set by the Consortium for Energy 

Efficiency (CEE), which require a SEER of 15 and an EER of 12.5 for split systems and 

SEER 14 and EER 12 for single-package systems. 

o	 Air-source heat pumps must have a HSPF of 9 or greater, SEER 15 or higher, and 

EER 13 or higher. 

o	 Ground-source heat pumps must meet the following criteria (the same criteria as 

for ENERGY STAR): 

 Closed-loop systems—14.1 cooling EER and 3.3 COP 

 Open-loop systems—16.2 EER and 3.6 COP 

 Direct-expansion systems—15 EER and 3.5 COP. In addition, groundsource heat pumps must include a desuperheater (which preheats water for 

a water heater) or an integrated water heating system. 

•	 Fans for heating and cooling systems: fan uses no more than 2 percent of total heating 

system energy use, as defined by DOE test procedure. 

•	 Water heaters: 

o	 Gas or propane water heaters—Energy Factor of at least 0.8. The only models that 

meet this standard currently are tankless water heaters and some systems that 

combine both space and water heating. 

o	 Heat pump water heaters—Energy Factor of at least 2.0 

17A.4.4 Energy Efficient Appliance Credits for Manufacturers 

Each manufacturer is limited to a total of $75 million for all credits under this provision. 

Of that cap, no more than $20 million can be claimed for the lowest tier of qualifying 

refrigerators. The tax credit amounts and criteria for production of energy-efficient appliances 

are as follows: 

• Clothes washers: $100 for models that meet the 2007 ENERGY STAR© criteria 

• Refrigerators (three tiers): 

o	 $75 for models that save at least 15 percent relative to 2001 Federal standards 

(same as the current ENERGY STAR criteria); available only in 2006 

o	 $125 for models that save at least 20 percent relative to 2001 Federal standards 

o	 $175 for models that save 25 percent or more relative to 2001 Federal standards 

• Dishwashers: $32.31 for models that meet the 2007 ENERGY STAR criteria 

17A-11
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES 

1	 Geroski, P.A., Models of Technology Diffusion. 2000. Research Policy. 29, 603-625. 

2	 Hall, B. H. and B. Khan. “Adoption of New Technology.” 2003. Working Paper No.E03-

330. Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA. 

3	 Lekvall, P. and C. Wahlbin. “A Study of Some Assumptions Underlying Innovation 

Diffusion Functions.” 1973. Swedish Journal of Economics. 

4	 Van den Bulte, C. “Want to Know How Diffusion Speed Varies Across Countries and 

Products? Try a Bass Model.” PDMA Vision, October 2002. Product Development and 

Management Association. XXVI No 4. 

5	 KEMA. Consumer Product Market Progress Evaluation Report 3. 2007. Prepared for 

Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. Kema, Inc.: Portland, OR. Report #07-174. 

6	 Itron And KEMA. 2004/2005 Statewide Residential Retrofit Single-Family Energy 

Efficiency Rebate Evaluation. 2007. Prepared for The California Public Utilities 

Commission, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, 

Southern California Edison, and Southern California Gas Company. Itron, Inc. and KEMA, 

Inc.: Oakland, CA. CPUC-Id#: 1115-04. 

7	 U.S. Department of Energy. Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for 

Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers, November 2007. 

Washington, DC. Chapter 8. 

<http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/home_appl_tsd.html> 

8	 U.S. Department of Energy. Final Rule Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy 

Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Clothes Washers, December 2000. 

Washington, DC. Chapter 7. 

<http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/clwash_0900_r.html > 

17A-12
 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1